You have got to be kidding me | Page 4 | The Boneyard

You have got to be kidding me

Plebe said:
No. The way you describe it is the way it happens. Seeding comes before placement. The overall #1 is always on the same half as overall #4 (this year that’s Baylor and Miss St), with #2 and #3 on the other half (ND and Louisville).
Expand ...
Okay, thanks for the clarification, Plebe. I thought Louisville was the overall #4 but if it's Mississippi State, then I'll put away the pitchfork. Strictly speaking then, Oregon should be the overall #5 and UConn the overall #6 but I'm guessing they may have swapped those two for geographical concerns.

It could be then, for UConn to win a national championship, the Huskies may have to beat the overall #3, #2 and #1 seeds. If that happens, I'd say UConn earned it.
 
Golden Husky said:
Strictly speaking then, Oregon should be the overall #5 and UConn the overall #6 but I'm guessing they may have swapped those two for geographical concerns.
Expand ...
Not really. The "true seed" is fixed; that is the S-curve. Any concessions to geography don't change a team's true seed, but it can change their regional placement from what strict observance of the S-curve would dictate.

Strictly speaking, UConn as overall #5 should have been sent to Portland to face overall #4 Mississippi State. That's where geography came into play, to UConn's benefit in fact, allowing UConn to stay in Albany rather than having to go to Portland.
 
Golden Husky said:
Okay, thanks for the clarification, Plebe. I thought Louisville was the overall #4 but if it's Mississippi State, then I'll put away the pitchfork. Strictly speaking then, Oregon should be the overall #5 and UConn the overall #6 but I'm guessing they may have swapped those two for geographical concerns.
Expand ...

Also note that Miami is the 4 in Portland. Louisville and Miami are both in the ACC.

Oregon State is the 4 in Albany. Putting Oregon State and Oregon both in Portland would have seemed extremely unfair to the 1 seed.

The other two 4 seeds are Texas A&M and South Carolina, both SEC mates with Mississippi State and not a desired SS matchup.
 
Golden Husky said:
Okay, thanks for the clarification, Plebe. I thought Louisville was the overall #4 but if it's Mississippi State, then I'll put away the pitchfork. Strictly speaking then, Oregon should be the overall #5 and UConn the overall #6 but I'm guessing they may have swapped those two for geographical concerns.
It could be then, for UConn to win a national championship, the Huskies may have to beat the overall #3, #2 and #1 seeds. If that happens, I'd say UConn earned it.
Expand ...

I just finished my bracket at espn, UConn will be the ultimate winner without having to face the overall #1/2/3 as someone else did that for UConn! :-)
 
.-.
IWearShoes said:
Well that's one of you.
Expand ...

What would have been better as far as the Top 8 are concerned?[/QUOTE]
If I were on the committee I would have an opinion worth listening to. Since I wasn't invited to join the committee, my opinion is just hot air.
 
bbsamjj said:
Has anyone seen a final ranking from the selection committee of where they put every team?

We know with the one seeds it went:

1. Baylor (goes closest to home, so SC)
2. ND (next closest, so Chicago)
3. Louisville (next closest, so Albany)
4. Miss St (next closest, so Portland)
(and then)
5. UConn
6. Oregon (?)
7. Stanford (?)
8. Iowa

I think the argument is not over whether UConn or Louisville should have been a #1 seed, but whether Miss St or UConn should have been a #1 seed. I think Baylor/ND/Louisville ahead of UConn was never going to change, and I think for all three of them that's justifiable (all have higher RPIs than UConn and better SOS, and two of them have wins over UConn).

I actually think UConn has a much better resume than Miss St, but that would mean UConn is sent out west, with Oregon almost certainly as their #2 in Portland. So here are the most likely options for the team:

Albany: #2 seed, with #1 Louisville
Portland: #1 seed, with #2 Oregon

I'm not a UConn fan, but not sure one seems that much better than the other.
Expand ...
The geography/distance adjustment doesn’t work that way, IIRC. UConn was going to be in Albany and Oregon
Plebe said:
Not really. The "true seed" is fixed; that is the S-curve. Any concessions to geography don't change a team's true seed, but it can change their regional placement from what strict observance of the S-curve would dictate.

Strictly speaking, UConn as overall #5 should have been sent to Portland to face overall #4 Mississippi State. That's where geography came into play, to UConn's benefit in fact, allowing UConn to stay in Albany rather than having to go to Portland.
Expand ...
I suppose they could have put Miss State as the 1 seed in Albany and sent Louisville to Portland. But there are lots of moving parts in making a bracket. I don't know if Vic complaining about getting sent to Albany mattered to the committee.

As others have noted, UConn's seed complaint should be comparing to Miss State more than comparing to Louisville. After the second reveal UConn was #4 overall and Miss State was #6. So, to me, the committee is basing Miss State taking UConn's 1 seed entirely on the conference tourneys, which makes the discussion of prior nonconference SoS irrelevant.
 
TBH, I don't understand why Huskies fans are so upset. The key thing was getting to stay in Albany, which you are. Whether you're the 1 seed or the 2 seed matters not one lick apart from the slight benefit of getting to play a 4 seed instead of a 3 seed, and in the case of the Albany regional, I'd actually rather face 3 seed Maryland than 4 seed OSU - the latter is more dangerous, much better coached, and has a history of pulling off March surprises (though I would not be *at all* surprised if you end up playing UCLA instead Maryland).

Moreover, you guys get what I think is the weakest of the 1 seeds - Louisville, and will get them for what will feel like a home game. I think you'd match up far more poorly against Miss St., so if you had been the last 1 seed, and they were the 2 seed for Albany, I'd say your final four chances would be weaker. For a team that finished 3-2 vs. the Top 25, that's not bad position to be in.

(By comparison, we went 7-2 against the Top 25, including getting the only win over the overall #1 seed, and ended up getting placed against Notre Dame in what will feel like an away game two time zones away in Chicago, if we are fortunate enough to get that far.)

So while you may be nominally a 2 seed, your route to the final four couldn't have been better than if you were a 1 seed, and I'm fairly confident Notre Dame is less excited to see Stanford again, and Miss. St. less excited to play Oregon in Portland. The only team with a better route is Baylor, and they're the overall #1, so that's as it should be.
 
Last edited:
It's not so much anger at being a 2 seed, though it is disappointing, it's the reason that was given by the committee and the implications going forward. I wish people could see beyond the next three weekends. Essentially the committee is saying to UConn if you want a number one seed from now on you better go undefeated, because anyone in a P5 conference within two losses is going to leap frog you in seeding even if they have bad losses on their resume and you don't. We might as well play a weak OOC schedule, roll into the tourney 32-0 every year, and take our chances.
 
IWearShoes said:
Gee, there sure is a lot of angst here. In summary...

Baylor, the clear #1 overall seed got sent as close as they could be to home and gets a Regional Final, if seeds hold, vs the clear weakest 2 seed in Iowa.

ND, the pretty clear overall #2, gets sent to the obvious and desireable Chicago regional to play the mostly clear 2nd weakest 2 seed in Stanford, if seeds hold.

Louisville, Mississippi State, UConn & Oregon, the #3-#6 overall seeds to most unbiased eyes (although not necessarily in that order), get distributed so the 1 seeds are traveling, but getting the advantage of playing a 4 seed in the SS. The 2 seeds, UConn and Oregon, are playing 3 seeds in the SS, but they're both close to home, giving them some advantage.

Seems to me the committee did an outstanding job.
Expand ...
Shoes, we normally agree on WBB topics but I think the committee did a terrible job. I realize they have constraints but UConn not being a number 1 seed really does not compute. I know Louisville beat UConn head to head but the ND game in the ACC Tournament was a beatdown. Louisville should be 6 overall team at best behind 1. Baylor, 2. UConn, 3. ND, 4. MSST, 5. Oregon, 6. Louisville.
 
.-.
TheFarmFan said:
TBH, I don't understand why Huskies fans are so upset. The key thing was getting to stay in Albany, which you are.
Expand ...
I've realized over the course of this discussion that this has nothing to do with facts or logic or pragmatics. Some people want to feel outraged because it's their way of expressing their passion for their team.

As I was told, "Why not let people feel upset?" When people have already made up their minds to be upset, there's not much use trying to reason with them.
 
mbr33ct said:
:D ...only until the games actually begin. Something to pass the time.
Expand ...
Ha Jay Bilas said exactly the same thing after the men's bracket was revealed. It's become a bona fide ritual and a sport of its own to complain about the bracket immediately upon its release. Then, as soon as the first ball gets tipped off, all of that magically dissipates.
 
I don't understand what all of the complaining is about. A month ago I stated that UConn's best case scenario to make the Final 4 was to have Louisville in their bracket. It happened! I doesn't matter who is 1 or 2.

What has happened now is that the team has put a lot of unneeded pressure on themselves, because if they lose to Louisville, they look like ______________ (You can fill in the blank with any appropriate word).
 
.-.
Fishy said:
.

This is so far off that I don’t think there’s a map to get you back to right.

They played three #1 seeds on the road....and they beat one of them. They also played Ohio State, Vandy, Old Miss, St. John’s, Purdue, DePaul, California, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Louisville.

They had one single opponent that was not from a power conference.

Can Louisville say that?

No. No one schedules OOC games like UConn does.
Expand ...

Fishy -- Are you aware that you are making a strong argument in favor of our #2 seed? UConn's non-conference SOS ranked 23rd, whereas that renowned powerhouse Drake had a NC SOS of 5. Here are some of the teams we played out of conference with their RPI ranking in parentheses:
Purdue (89); Ohio State (101); Saint John's (117); Oklahoma (153); Vanderbilt (209); and Ole Miss (239). In addition, we only played 12 games against Q1 and Q2 opponents compared to ND, Baylor, and Louisville that all had more than 20 games against teams in those categories.
 
oldude said:
I will take a bizarre and somewhat contrarian position here. The Committee & ESPN actually want UConn in the FF. They also want 2 marquee matchups: Baylor vs MS St & UConn vs ND. They can’t give UConn the overall #1 seed and a potential matchup with the easiest Elite 8 opponent, Iowa. If UConn had won at least one of their two road losses, it might have been a different story.

The problem was what to do with MS St. If UConn is the last 1 seed, then MS St, a bad matchup for the Huskies, is the 2 seed in Albany. If MS St wins, they potentially still get MS St vs Baylor, but no ND - UConn. If UConn wins, then we have an even worse matchup for the Huskies in the semifinals vs Baylor.

By sending MS St out west where they have a chance to beat an Oregon team that’s shown some vulnerability in the last month, they setup the potential matchups they and ESPN want in the FF, and they send Louisville to Albany, where they will be an underdog, assuming they get by a Scott Rueck coached OR St.

As a reminder, the last time Jeff Walz brought in a heavily favored Louisville team to the Albany Regional, the Cardinals lost to mid-major Dayton.
Expand ...
Interesting take on this @oldude .... I like it and it really makes sense... although nothing like what the head of the committee said to "defend" their decisions. BUT again, I like your take.
 
heavyhusky said:
Fishy -- Are you aware that you are making a strong argument in favor of our #2 seed? UConn's non-conference SOS ranked 23rd, whereas that renowned powerhouse Drake had a NC SOS of 5. Here are some of the teams we played out of conference with their RPI ranking in parentheses:
Purdue (89); Ohio State (101); Saint John's (117); Oklahoma (153); Vanderbilt (209); and Ole Miss (239). In addition, we only played 12 games against Q1 and Q2 opponents compared to ND, Baylor, and Louisville that all had more than 20 games against teams in those categories.
Expand ...

Dude....UConn went on the road and played three teams the committee felt were one seeds.

Show me one instance where Louisville actually played a challenging road game. If you say Central Michigan or Boise, I will ban you from this website until the day the sun swallows the earth.
 
.-.
nwhoopfan said:
Probably wasn't as much fretting back then.
Expand ...
The fretting back then was whether we would win by 30 or 50. I mean we were winning national championship games by 30 back in those days.
 
hoopsfan22 said:
The fretting back then was whether we would win by 30 or 50. I mean we were winning national championship games by 30 back in those days.
Expand ...

Ah, the good old days, when there was no suspense or intrigue at all, when we all knew from the opening tip off of the season who would win the Title.
 
Plebe said:
No, this is not true. Louisville was the 3, UConn the 5. The committee chair explicitly said that UConn was the top #2 seed. The committee can and does deviate from the S-curve for geography reasons. In this case, that allowed UConn to stay in Albany rather than going to Portland.
Expand ...
and it allowed ORE to stay in Pac NW.
 
nwhoopfan said:
Ah, the good old days, when there was no suspense or intrigue at all, when we all knew from the opening tip off of the season who would win the Title.
Expand ...
You could look at it that way, or you could admire the way those teams played the game and hope your favorite team strives for that standard.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
167,983
Messages
4,548,306
Members
10,431
Latest member
TeganK


Top Bottom